3
$\begingroup$

According to CAR 302.31(3) "Compliance with Air Traffic Control Instructions and Clearances"

The pilot-in-command of an aircraft may deviate from an air traffic control clearance or an air traffic control instruction to the extent necessary to carry out a collision avoidance manoeuvre, if the manoeuvre is carried out

(a) in accordance with a resolution advisory generated by an ACAS; or

(b) in response to an alert from a TAWS or a Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS).

I know that even in controlled airspace with separation/conflict resolution, and without equipment mentioned in (a) and (b) it is the responsibility of the pilot to avoid collisions. Is that covered by a different CAR?

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

You are correct, it applies when operating in the vicinity of an aerodrome:

Division V — Operations at or in the Vicinity of an Aerodrome

602.96 (1) This section applies to persons operating VFR or IFR aircraft at or in the vicinity of an uncontrolled or controlled aerodrome.

(3) The pilot-in-command of an aircraft operating at or in the vicinity of an aerodrome shall

(a) observe aerodrome traffic for the purpose of avoiding a collision;

Also this part:

Part VI — General Operating and Flight Rules

602.19 (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section,

(a) the pilot-in-command of an aircraft that has the right of way shall, if there is any risk of collision, take such action as is necessary to avoid collision; and

(b) where the pilot-in-command of an aircraft is aware that another aircraft is in an emergency situation, the pilot-in-command shall give way to that other aircraft.

The way I'd interpret the above is vigilance in see-and-avoid is always there, unless of course you don't have ACAS and TAWS and flying IFR in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC).

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Does that mean though that when not in the vicinity of an aerodrome I must not "deviate from an air traffic control clearance or an air traffic control instruction to the extent necessary to carry out a collision avoidance manoeuvre" unless (a) or (b) above are met? $\endgroup$ – Tobias Mar 15 '17 at 3:51
  • $\begingroup$ @Tobias added new section $\endgroup$ – ymb1 Mar 15 '17 at 11:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ That makes perfect sense, how did I not see that! Thanks for digging. $\endgroup$ – Tobias Mar 15 '17 at 16:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.